Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the tty tree got a conflict in:
drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
between commit:
8679328eb859 ("serial: Reduce spinlocked portion of uart_rs485_config()")
from the tty.current tree and commit:
559c7ff4e324 ("serial: core: Use port lock wrappers")
from the tty tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
index ca26a8aef2cb,b32bbd7aa3d3..000000000000
--- a/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
@@@ -1413,9 -1409,7 +1413,9 @@@ static int uart_rs485_config(struct uar
uart_sanitize_serial_rs485(port, rs485);
uart_set_rs485_termination(port, rs485);
- spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags);
++ uart_port_lock_irqsave(port, flags);
ret = port->rs485_config(port, NULL, rs485);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
++ uart_port_unlock_irqrestore(port, flags);
if (ret)
memset(rs485, 0, sizeof(*rs485));
@@@ -2480,12 -2474,13 +2480,12 @@@ int uart_resume_port(struct uart_drive
if (ret == 0) {
if (tty)
uart_change_line_settings(tty, state, NULL);
+ uart_rs485_config(uport);
- spin_lock_irq(&uport->lock);
+ uart_port_lock_irq(uport);
if (!(uport->rs485.flags & SER_RS485_ENABLED))
ops->set_mctrl(uport, uport->mctrl);
- else
- uart_rs485_config(uport);
ops->start_tx(uport);
- spin_unlock_irq(&uport->lock);
+ uart_port_unlock_irq(uport);
tty_port_set_initialized(port, true);
} else {
/*
@@@ -2592,10 -2587,10 +2592,10 @@@ uart_configure_port(struct uart_driver
port->mctrl &= TIOCM_DTR;
if (!(port->rs485.flags & SER_RS485_ENABLED))
port->ops->set_mctrl(port, port->mctrl);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
- else
- uart_rs485_config(port);
+ uart_port_unlock_irqrestore(port, flags);
+ uart_rs485_config(port);
+
/*
* If this driver supports console, and it hasn't been
* successfully registered yet, try to re-register it.
Hi all,
On Wed, 4 Oct 2023 12:55:31 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tty tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 8679328eb859 ("serial: Reduce spinlocked portion of uart_rs485_config()")
>
> from the tty.current tree and commit:
>
> 559c7ff4e324 ("serial: core: Use port lock wrappers")
>
> from the tty tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
Not quite right :-( This is what I used:
diff --cc drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
index ca26a8aef2cb,b32bbd7aa3d3..ae1d6782ea0e
--- a/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
@@@ -1413,9 -1409,7 +1413,9 @@@ static int uart_rs485_config(struct uar
uart_sanitize_serial_rs485(port, rs485);
uart_set_rs485_termination(port, rs485);
- spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags);
++ uart_port_lock_irqsave(port, &flags);
ret = port->rs485_config(port, NULL, rs485);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
++ uart_port_unlock_irqrestore(port, flags);
if (ret)
memset(rs485, 0, sizeof(*rs485));
@@@ -2480,12 -2474,13 +2480,12 @@@ int uart_resume_port(struct uart_drive
if (ret == 0) {
if (tty)
uart_change_line_settings(tty, state, NULL);
+ uart_rs485_config(uport);
- spin_lock_irq(&uport->lock);
+ uart_port_lock_irq(uport);
if (!(uport->rs485.flags & SER_RS485_ENABLED))
ops->set_mctrl(uport, uport->mctrl);
- else
- uart_rs485_config(uport);
ops->start_tx(uport);
- spin_unlock_irq(&uport->lock);
+ uart_port_unlock_irq(uport);
tty_port_set_initialized(port, true);
} else {
/*
@@@ -2592,10 -2587,10 +2592,10 @@@ uart_configure_port(struct uart_driver
port->mctrl &= TIOCM_DTR;
if (!(port->rs485.flags & SER_RS485_ENABLED))
port->ops->set_mctrl(port, port->mctrl);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
- else
- uart_rs485_config(port);
+ uart_port_unlock_irqrestore(port, flags);
+ uart_rs485_config(port);
+
/*
* If this driver supports console, and it hasn't been
* successfully registered yet, try to re-register it.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 01:14:32PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2023 12:55:31 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the tty tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > 8679328eb859 ("serial: Reduce spinlocked portion of uart_rs485_config()")
> >
> > from the tty.current tree and commit:
> >
> > 559c7ff4e324 ("serial: core: Use port lock wrappers")
> >
> > from the tty tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> > is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> > complex conflicts.
>
> Not quite right :-( This is what I used:
>
> diff --cc drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
> index ca26a8aef2cb,b32bbd7aa3d3..ae1d6782ea0e
> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
> @@@ -1413,9 -1409,7 +1413,9 @@@ static int uart_rs485_config(struct uar
> uart_sanitize_serial_rs485(port, rs485);
> uart_set_rs485_termination(port, rs485);
>
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags);
> ++ uart_port_lock_irqsave(port, &flags);
> ret = port->rs485_config(port, NULL, rs485);
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
> ++ uart_port_unlock_irqrestore(port, flags);
> if (ret)
> memset(rs485, 0, sizeof(*rs485));
>
> @@@ -2480,12 -2474,13 +2480,12 @@@ int uart_resume_port(struct uart_drive
> if (ret == 0) {
> if (tty)
> uart_change_line_settings(tty, state, NULL);
> + uart_rs485_config(uport);
> - spin_lock_irq(&uport->lock);
> + uart_port_lock_irq(uport);
> if (!(uport->rs485.flags & SER_RS485_ENABLED))
> ops->set_mctrl(uport, uport->mctrl);
> - else
> - uart_rs485_config(uport);
> ops->start_tx(uport);
> - spin_unlock_irq(&uport->lock);
> + uart_port_unlock_irq(uport);
> tty_port_set_initialized(port, true);
> } else {
> /*
> @@@ -2592,10 -2587,10 +2592,10 @@@ uart_configure_port(struct uart_driver
> port->mctrl &= TIOCM_DTR;
> if (!(port->rs485.flags & SER_RS485_ENABLED))
> port->ops->set_mctrl(port, port->mctrl);
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
> - else
> - uart_rs485_config(port);
> + uart_port_unlock_irqrestore(port, flags);
>
> + uart_rs485_config(port);
> +
> /*
> * If this driver supports console, and it hasn't been
> * successfully registered yet, try to re-register it.
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
Thanks, looks good, I'll use this when I resolve the merge conflict when
it hits my branches.
greg k-h
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 08:38:51AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 01:14:32PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > On Wed, 4 Oct 2023 12:55:31 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the tty tree got a conflict in:
> > >
> > > drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
> > >
> > > between commit:
> > >
> > > 8679328eb859 ("serial: Reduce spinlocked portion of uart_rs485_config()")
> > >
> > > from the tty.current tree and commit:
> > >
> > > 559c7ff4e324 ("serial: core: Use port lock wrappers")
> > >
> > > from the tty tree.
> > >
> > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> > > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> > > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> > > is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> > > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> > > complex conflicts.
> >
> > Not quite right :-( This is what I used:
> >
> > diff --cc drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
> > index ca26a8aef2cb,b32bbd7aa3d3..ae1d6782ea0e
> > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/serial_core.c
> > @@@ -1413,9 -1409,7 +1413,9 @@@ static int uart_rs485_config(struct uar
> > uart_sanitize_serial_rs485(port, rs485);
> > uart_set_rs485_termination(port, rs485);
> >
> > - spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags);
> > ++ uart_port_lock_irqsave(port, &flags);
> > ret = port->rs485_config(port, NULL, rs485);
> > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
> > ++ uart_port_unlock_irqrestore(port, flags);
> > if (ret)
> > memset(rs485, 0, sizeof(*rs485));
> >
> > @@@ -2480,12 -2474,13 +2480,12 @@@ int uart_resume_port(struct uart_drive
> > if (ret == 0) {
> > if (tty)
> > uart_change_line_settings(tty, state, NULL);
> > + uart_rs485_config(uport);
> > - spin_lock_irq(&uport->lock);
> > + uart_port_lock_irq(uport);
> > if (!(uport->rs485.flags & SER_RS485_ENABLED))
> > ops->set_mctrl(uport, uport->mctrl);
> > - else
> > - uart_rs485_config(uport);
> > ops->start_tx(uport);
> > - spin_unlock_irq(&uport->lock);
> > + uart_port_unlock_irq(uport);
> > tty_port_set_initialized(port, true);
> > } else {
> > /*
> > @@@ -2592,10 -2587,10 +2592,10 @@@ uart_configure_port(struct uart_driver
> > port->mctrl &= TIOCM_DTR;
> > if (!(port->rs485.flags & SER_RS485_ENABLED))
> > port->ops->set_mctrl(port, port->mctrl);
> > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
> > - else
> > - uart_rs485_config(port);
> > + uart_port_unlock_irqrestore(port, flags);
> >
> > + uart_rs485_config(port);
> > +
> > /*
> > * If this driver supports console, and it hasn't been
> > * successfully registered yet, try to re-register it.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > Stephen Rothwell
>
> Thanks, looks good, I'll use this when I resolve the merge conflict when
> it hits my branches.
This should now be resolved in my tree, thanks!
greg k-h